Pestle v. City of Miami

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Pestle v. City of Miami

208 So. 3d 1253, 2017 WL 362515, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 738

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 25, 2017·No. No. 3D15-2050·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Sarasota Citizens for Responsible Gov’t v. City of Sarasota, 48 So.3d 755 (Fla. 2010) (finding private negotiations between deputy county administrator and members of the county board of commissioners, conducted for purposes of developing memorandum of understanding, did not violate Sunshine Law as no final action was taken and any violation would have been cured by subsequent pub-lically noticed meeting of the board); Tolar v. Sch. Bd. of Liberty Cnty., 398 So.2d 427, 429 (Fla. 1981) (“The Board’s action was not merely a ceremonial acceptance of secret actions and was not merely a perfunctory ratification of secret decisions at a later meeting open to the public.”).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Sarasota Citizens for Responsible Gov’t v. City of Sarasota, 48 So.3d 755 (Fla. 2010) (finding private negotiations between deputy county administrator and members of the county board of commissioners, conducted for purposes of developing memorandum of understanding, did not violate Sunshine Law as no final action was taken and any violation would have been cured by subsequent pub-lically noticed meeting of the board); Tolar v. Sch. Bd. of Liberty Cnty., 398 So.2d 427, 429 (Fla. 1981) (“The Board’s action was not merely a ceremonial acceptance of secret actions and was not merely a perfunctory ratification of secret decisions at a later meeting open to the public.”).

Pestle v. City of Miami, 208 So. 3d 1253, 2017 WL 362515, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 738 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

208 So. 3d 1253 (Pestle v. City of Miami) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related